V. I.

Lenin

Throughout the world a section of the workers, as is well
known, still follows the lead of various bourgeois parties. During the
period of bourgeois-democratic reform in Russia, a minority of the
class-conscious workers still follows the lead of the bourgeois group of
liquidationist writers, and of the bourgeois-democratic Narodnik trend.

It has been reiterated many times in precise, clearly formulated and official
decisions of the Marxists (1903, 1907 and
1913) [2] that the entire Narodnik trend, including the Left Narodniks,
is a bourgeois (peasant) democracy in Russia. That some of the workers
should follow the lead of the Left Narodniks, who describe radical
peasant (but in substance downright bourgeois ) demands as
“socialism”, is quite natural in a capitalist country during an intense
movement against survivals of serfdom.

But exactly which section of the class-conscious workers follows the
lead of the Left Narodniks?

Sovremennik , one of the most unprincipled intellectualist
journals, which (on the basis of false phrases) “unites” the Left
Narodniks, Plekhanov, and Mr. Potresov and Co., recently stated that
“about” one-third of the workers follow the lead of the Left Narodniks.

This is a barefaced, deliberate lie, like those commonly uttered by the
liquidators.

As far as we know, only three sets of objective data showing the degree
of influence the Left Narodniks exercise among the workers are
available. These are, firstly, the circulation figures of the
newspapers. Secondly, the figures showing the number of workers’ groups
which have collected funds.

Thirdly, the figures showing the number of delegates elected to the
Metropolitan Insurance Board.

We shall compare these data, which differ from the bare faced lies of
Martov, Himmer and Co. in that anybody can find them in open and
public sources appertaining to the different parties, and verify
them.

| | Prav- dists | Liqui- dators | Left Narod- niks | per cent |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Prav- dists | Liqui- dators | Left Narod- niks |
| Number of copies of St. Petersburg news papers published per week . . . . . . . | 240,000 | 96,000 | 36,000 | 64.5 | 25.8 | 9.7 |
| Number of collections by workers’ groups for whole of 1913 . . . . . . . . | 2,181 | 661 | 264 | 70.2 | 21.3 | 8.5 |
| For 1914 (up to May 13) . . . . . . . . | 2,873 | 671 | 524 | 70.6 | 16.6 | 12.8 |
| Number of delegates elected to Metropoli- tan Insurance Board | 37 | 7 | 4 | 77.1 | 14.6 | 8.3 |

The circulation figures are the most “favourable” to the bourgeois
groups (the liquidators and Left Narodniks). But the liquidator and
Left-Narodnik newspapers are bourgeois newspapers, not working-class! This is proved by the figures of the funds collected (from
January 1 to May 13, 1914). The liquidators’ reports show that 56 per cent
of their total collections came from non-workers ( Trudovaya Pravda
No. 15). [1]

In the case of the Left Narodniks, 50 per cent of their collections came
from this source. More over, as far as is known, the Left Narodniks have
never published the financial reports of their newspaper, which, like that
of the liquidators, is evidently maintained by rich friends from among the bourgeoisie .

The Pravdist newspaper is the only working-class newspaper. Both the
liquidationist and the Left-Narodnik news papers are bourgeois newspapers . No lie can refute this objective fact .

The figures of the workers’ groups approach most closely and exactly to
European party membership figures.

The number of Left-Narodnik groups is growing very rapidly (it has
doubled in the course of the year) and now constitutes 12.8 per cent of the
total groups of all the newspapers. Their number is growing at the expense of the liquidators , for the number of the latter’s groups is
almost at a standstill (an increase of only ten groups in the first half of
1914 at a time when the working-class movement showed an enormous growth)
and their percentage is diminishing :
from 21.3 per cent to 16.6 per cent.

By their opportunism and renunciation of the Party, the liquidators are
pushing their working-class supporters towards the other , more
“radical” (in word) bourgeois group.

Between 1913 and 1914, the Pravdists obtained 692 new groups, the
liquidators 10, and the Left Narodniks 260. In percentages the increases
are: Pravdists plus 31.7, liquidators plus 1.5, Left Narodniks plus 100
(small figures always increase faster than big ones; for example, if
Plekhanov has nine workers’ groups and, by the time of Vienna—and for
Vienna [3] —there will be 27 or 45, the percentage increase will be
plus 200, or plus 400).

The Insurance Board election figures apply only to St. Petersburg. It
should be said that in 1914 the Left Narodniks in St. Petersburg are
ahead of the liquidators as far as collection by workers’ groups
is concerned.

Thus, between January 1 and May 13, 1914, the Pravdists in
St. Petersburg received contributions from 2,024 workers’ groups, the
liquidators from 308 and the Left Narodniks from 391 groups. The
percentages are: Pravdists 74.3, liquidators 11.4, Left Narodniks 14.3.

Like the true opportunists they are, our liquidators reacted to this
increase in strength of the Left Narodniks, not by intensifying their
struggle for the principles of Marxism, but by entering into a bloc with
the Left Narodniks against the Marxists (Pravdists)!

The Left Narodniks, in Sovremennik , openly advocate such an
alliance on behalf of all their leaders; but the liquidators lack the courage to explain their conduct to the workers openly and
straightforwardly. They do it in an underhand way. They are genuine Cadets.

For example. Recently, the Left-Narodnik newspaper ( Zhivaya Mysl Truda No. 3, June 15, 1914) published an article entitled “The
Insurance Delegates Elections at the Aivaz Works”. In this article we
read: ... “Of necessity, the Aivaz workers will be offered a choice of two
lists:
one, a joint Menshevik and Left-Narodnik list ... the other a
Pravdist list....” (Our italics.)

Alliance with the liquidators is interpreted in this article by the
Left Narodniks as the principle of co-operation among all
“ socialist ” trends, i. e., the liquidators are alleged to have
renounced not only the resolution of 1907, which defined the Left Narodniks
as a bourgeois trend, but also the resolution of 1903 proposed by Axelrod.

Marxists regard the increase in the Left Narodniks’ strength as a
symptom, or presage, of a revival among the peasantry which, of course, is
enough to “turn the heads” of non-class-conscious proletarians and
petty-bourgeois intellectuals. As far as we Marxists are concerned, this
fact will only stimulate our efforts in advocating Marxism as against
petty-bourgeois Narodism.

Fellow-workers! Put less faith in promises and fairy-tales! Study more
closely the objective data on your own working-class movement and
on how the bourgeois ideas and the bourgeois practices of the liquidators
and Left Narodniks influence a minority of the workers.

---
Notes:
[1]
See pp. 363–71 of this volume.— Ed .

[2]
Lenin is referring to the resolution of the Second Congress of the
R.S.D.L.P. in 1903 “On the Socialist-Revolutionaries”; the resolution of
the Fifth (London) Congress of the R.S.D.L.P. (1907) on “Attitude Towards
the Bourgeois Parties”, the resolution of the Poronin meeting of the
Central Committee of the R.S.D.L.P. on “The Narodniks”. (See The C.P.S.U. in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenary Meetings of the Central Committee , Russ. ed., Part I, 1954,
pp. 49–50; 158–60; 316–17.)

[3]
This refers to the Tenth International Congress, which was to have been
held in Vienna. The question of the Vienna Congress was discussed at the
meeting of the International Socialist Bureau held in December 1913. It was
resolved to convene the Congress in August 1914, to coincide with the celebration of the fiftieth
anniversary of the First International. The agenda was to have been as
follows: =

1) The high cost of living, =

2) Imperialism and the fight against militarism—including the subordinate
questions: (a) the Eastern question, (b) compulsory courts of arbitration
among nations, and c) the United States of Europe; =

3) Alcoholism, =

4) Unemployment, =

5) The position of political prisoners and exiles in Russia, and =

6) Miscellanea.

The number of delegates was not to exceed the number of votes of the
given country by more than sixfold. Russia had 20 votes, consequently not
more than 120 delegates for both subsections of the Social-Democrats and
the Left Narodniks and for the trade unions.

The question of the International Socialist Congress in Vienna was
discussed at the Poronin meeting of the C. C. and Party workers. Lenin made
a report on this question, and proposed that every effort be made to send a
majority of Social-Democratic worker delegates to the Vienna Congress.

Election of delegates to the International Socialist Congress was
practically completed by the end of July 1914, but the out break of war
prevented the Congress from convening.